82 replies to this topic

[XM15]

There really needs to be two things to happen. There needs to be a LMS (last mech standing) mode (no base cap), perhaps with more than two teams, and definately more players. My understanding is this game is going to have much larger teams and more than two teams in a round. Why are we still stuck with 8 on a team? Why not 12 or 16 on a team? I understand this is Beta, but for heavens sake, we have been plagued with small teams and base capping modes for long enough. I understand that the servers are plently capable of handling twice (or much more) the players in a round, so why not put it up already. the bugs have plagued most players and more modes and players in a round isn't going to make for more map/hud/shader/etc bugs. They are a seperate problem from the amount of players or mode.

[Zerberus]

If a TDM mode gets introduced, there needs to be a way to specifically deselect it while allowing queing for Con and Assault.

Many of us have no interest in playing "find the shutdown raven" on a map like Torumaline or Alpine.

Many of those same people start laughing hysterically everytime a "cap-whine" thread comes up.

People whine on Assault about getting capped, because they were too lazy or stupid to defend their own base.

Many of thje same people whine about losing to cap on conquest, because they are still being lazy and stupid, allowing the other team to take 4 or even 5 bases and stand around sitting on their thumbs behind a ridge ("No, I`m a Range support Dragon, I don`t cap bases" *facepalm*). Then they whine even harder when it 7:0 but they`re already down 650 resources.

Bottom line: If your plan and tactics allow for the round to be won by a single light running round doing nothing but capping and smoking a cigar, your plan and tactics suck ***, and need to be adapted.

Funny how you never see whine threads about IEDs, campers, snipers, and guerrilla tactics on Military forums... probably because anybody that has spent even 5 minute in any sort of active unit quickly learns how to differentiate between personal failboating and "unrealistic objectives". A lot of people here would benefit from exactly that knowledge.

I don`t think it`s in any way coincidental that the people that almost never lose to cap are the same people that cap what they cam, when they can. It`s called "understanding your mission objectives".

Others harp on realism (It shouldn`t be that easy / you should have to destroy something), usually the same ones that complain about capping.... what exactly is realistic about standing out in the open waiting to get shot when all you really need to do is drive over to the left, get out, shoot a scientist, and grab his birefcase? 99.9% of the military units in this dimension or any other dimension understand the laws of attrition, and don`t engage in unnecessary combat when the objectives can be acueved more easily and more importantly safely.

Don`t get me wrong, I understand people not wanting to play mode X for reason Y, and it`s their good right, just as it is mine to say no to TDM.. But the problem is usually not the game mode, it`s that people don`t understand how it works and what to do to guarantee a win, and can`t be arsed with self reflection because it might mean they`re doing something wrong. Which in fact, they are.

What makes me laugh the hardest is teh "one soloist capping". If youprople could reatd the other team`s chat, youd find that that is very often the TEAMS idea....So that Solist is in fact the real team player, as opposed to the jumpsniper that can`t be arsed to move, focus fire, or turn around when he heasrt "base is being captured". Who`s really being a soloist in that situation, the guy doing what the team wants or the guy opening up his kill and dmg stats after the match and *********** to them?

The pseudo gladiators and 1337 sN1p3r5 will get their arena soon enough, and then the brawlers will be whining about the snipers and the snipers will be whining about the brawlers. Same ****, different day, still caused by ego-driven agendas of people incapable of self reflection and adaptation that want their own personal easymode, becasue they`re so 1337 that it`s embarassing for them to be tactically bested in 9/10 matches.

In closing, food for thought: One definition of insanity is doing the exact same thing over and over again buit expecting different results.

Edited by Zerberus, 29 April 2013 - 11:20 AM.

[XM15]

If you don't like the idea of TDM or LMS Zeberus, then don't post here. I don't think players that are posting here were looking for your divine knowlege of realism when it come to combat and objectives. They were hoping for a fun game without the posibility of being capped by a lone mech who avoids a fight. I know and fully understand the tactics of achieving an objective without incurring loss, or at least as little as possible. This is a game, and people like different modes. For those of us that play at odd times and just want to jump in a match (PUG) there isn't much chance of good tactics when there are so many players out there that have no experience in it. I understand and repect your feelings Zeberus, but this is not the thread for your post.

Edited by XM15, 29 April 2013 - 11:27 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Why does Bryan come in and drop one line that really doesn't give the full story at all. And honestly will probably rile us up more than anything; instead of coming into this thread and doing this...

"Hey guys, I realize caps bother a portion of our player base, why don't you guys continue to brainstorm some ideas to fix it. I can't promise anything will happen, but we'll definitely keep an eye on the thread.

To give you some of the statistics we're seeing, only 19% of assault games end with caps. So I'm not sure we're seeing a wide spread problem".

Done.

And then maybe send that guy, who's job it is to be the community manager to spend 10-15 minutes replying in the thread, maybe expand on those statistics a bit.

[XM15]

I don't think what some players are asking for is due to a "wide spread problem", it is due to a preference. Some people prefer not to have to worry about staying in range of their cap to protect it. Some people like to sneak aorund the long way and get behind their enemy where they are typically weakest and suprise them. The way it is in assault and conquest you have to either run from cap to cap or try and place yourself inbetween your enemy and your cap. Either way, the cap is the obsticle some of us are tired of having to defend or attack. With the idea of what mechwarrior is and the grand plans of many game types and verying numbers of players in a game I don't understand why it is so hard to just take the cap out for those that don't want to deal with it. It completely changes the tactics a team will use to win. Right now pug matches seem to be every mech for themself anyway. Maybe removing the cap will inspire players to try different approaches. As the game is, it wont last a year. The majority of my friends list are never on. When I talk to them in other games they say they are waiting for new content (ie..modes and more players) none are asking for more maps. They are getting bored and this is still in Beta. Come BF4 and ArmA3 I wont even play this anymore if they don't start adding modes and larger numbers in a round. 8v8 is too small for some of the maps and more players would make it much more interesting. Only 2 game types is not enough for any game to survive these days. Even if it is Beta, as some will surely say, it is not an excuse to not add more types. They have had no trouble adding plenty of mechs and too much "bling" if you ask me. There is always something going on to try and get player to buy more needless cockpit items and "special" paint schemes. I also understand the "pay for items" is what keeps the game going. Wanna sell more needless stuff? Add more content that interests more players and they will spend more money.

[XM15]

And I agree, there is not enough attention paid by the creators of this game in the forums. I also understand that there is a lot of crap being said. In reading this particular thread I notice it is mostly players looking for something more than what is currently offered. It is logical that players want more than what is currently being offered, especially if they are paying players like myself. For those that play for free and have no intention of putting up some funding, they just need to not post and not ask for anything.

[Vodrin Thales]

Homeless Bill, on 23 April 2013 - 04:38 PM, said:

There seems to be no escape. If I play Conquest, I get one light running around with no hope of success for five minutes, and if I play Assault, someone goes for the reach-around. I just want one game mode that offers a real fight with no escape.

Sad to say but there is, and will never be, any such thing. If they ever were to make a team deathmatch you will inevitably see a light mech taking off and shutting down rather than be destroyed. Resulting in everyone else sitting around waiting for the timer to expire.

And if you think it is boring now watching all the snipe warriors in defensive position, think about how much worse it will be when you cannot force them to move by capping.

In other words, complain all you want about objectives, but not having them causes more problems than it solves.

Aloha, on 25 April 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

What's the percentage of Assault ending in Base Caps with NO damage done by either side?

I suspect very low. I've had it happen twice since January.

[Vodrin Thales]

Muffinator, on 27 April 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

So 1 in 5 games are ruined...

I'd say 1 in 5 teams get really far out of position and are outmaneuvered. Most games that end in cap still involve a lot of fighting.

[XM15]

And yet people are still posting in this string about how they don't like this idea. It is just another game type. No one is asking for the others to be deleted, or for those who don't want to to play it. There are alternatives to intentional shutdown to hide in this game type. Just force players to have a limited time for shutdown and have them power back up automatically, incur damage, or don't let power downs hide the mech in this game type. It's not rocket science, it's a video game. What does it matter, it's only 15 minute rounds. The way the game runs now, I many times end up on a team with all heavies if I run a heavy and mediums and lights when I go that route. You can't pick your team when you go pug, you get what the server deals out. I still think the ballancing should be damage based and not weight based. It would make more sense. When I get on TS with three friends and join we tend to dominate, even when the other 4 don't stick with us.

[BlackWidow]

Bryan Ekman, on 25 April 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Interesting stat - 19% of Assault wins come from Base Caps. 81% of victories come from destroying the opposition.

Yes. But, now please post what % of base cap wins Alpine and Tourmaline have compared to the others. I suspect it will be MUCH MUCH higher.

[Lyoto Machida]

Zerberus, on 29 April 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

In closing, food for thought: One definition of insanity is doing the exact same thing over and over again buit expecting different results.

You just saying this because Joe Rogan said it during the UFC 159 PPV Saturday night?

[Preadator187]

When I get a assault match on a big map such as Alpine, or Tournmaline I mock anyone who is capping. I usually say something like "They should make a new map which has no guns but instead all you do is cap, or i just make fun of them, or ask them to not cap.

sometimes just asking them to not cap works

[Dry Spill]

Surely I'm not the only person to have thought of a King-Of-The-Hill mode?

7 minute timer wherein the map's center point cannot be captured, then victory goes to the team that captures the point or destroys all enemy mechs.

[XM15]

Haha Preadator187, I just try taunting them, that rarely works. I understand capping when your team is going to lose in assault, but many players are more interested in a winning round than a straight up fight. I don't think they realize they earn less money and xp by capping and causing no damage than loosing in a fight. Not to mention their mech driving skills are not tested by sneaking around and capping. And their stats only matter to themselves. I never look up a player and check their win loss ratio, but their K/D ratio is more important. I would rather have players on my team that have a high K/D ratio than a bunch of wins by cap.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

First - I like playing a scout ... in my JR7-F especially. In assault on Alpine and Tourmaline, I like trying to spot the enemy team early an passing that information on to my team. Once the sniping starts, I'll evaluate my options - defend myself against other light 'mechs, join the fight (harass, flank, etc.), keep spotting, go back an defend our base, or try to disrupt the enemy by capping their base.

Once the brawl starts, I'll almost always try to join in ... that's where the real fun is.

However, if I'm the only light ... going back to defend our base is a major gamble, unless I've got back-up coming, it's as likely as not that I'll find myself outnumbered or seriously outgunned ... and I won't be able to report back until the engagement is over, one way or another (a typing light pilot is a dead light pilot).

From what I understand, the concern (some would say problem) is rushing straight to base capping, particularly on Alpine and Tourmaline. It can be a minor nuisance on Frozen City and River City, if each team goes different directions and never meets, but I don't think that's the real issue ... it's the big maps, where one unnoticed light 'mech can circle around and cap the base before someone with moderate speed can get back to break the capture.

This is a big assumption ... but let's assume that the most of the light 'mech pilots are like me and just want to contribute to their team's win (by forcing the opposition to break their lines), and they're not doing it specifically to ruin your fun.

So, how do we enable the light 'mech pilot (who might be the only light in the group of PUGs) to contribute, when the opposition, and the rest of his team, are nothing but heavy and assault direct fire snipers and brawlers?

When LRMs were more common, TAG helped, but TAG's maximum range is inside the normal sensor package's range (and 700m snipes with ERPPCs are not unusual) ... it's not as effective as it could be. Even with BAP and Advanced Sensor Range, the sight lines on Tourmaline pretty much require you to be within 800m to get an effective target lock (assuming no ECM). On Alpine, most scouting is visual ... you can spot mechs almost 2000m away, so scouts are only really useful until the fighting starts.

I think that if TAG could be used to relay sensor information from a less risky distance (say, 1200m) it would more effectively help counter ECM and would make scouts more effective, and maybe less likely to just rush a base cap (which isn't , in my opinion, particularly fun).

Edit: formatting to make it easier to read.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 29 April 2013 - 06:31 PM.

[Lord Psycho]

yes, where is the "knife fight in a phone booth" mode?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Zerberus, on 29 April 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

If a TDM mode gets introduced, there needs to be a way to specifically deselect it while allowing queing for Con and Assault.

Many of us have no interest in playing "find the shutdown raven" on a map like Torumaline or Alpine.

then dont.
hey that was easy wasnt it?
We can already opt out of game modes, why would you think it will be different later on?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

One thing I don't get is the assumption that TDM = Chase the light.

Throw a 10 minute timer on it. And most mechs alive wins. If it's 1 v 1 at the end, have damage done or something like that be the tie breaker.

[Keifomofutu]

BlackWidow, on 29 April 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

Yes. But, now please post what % of base cap wins Alpine and Tourmaline have compared to the others. I suspect it will be MUCH MUCH higher.

[Zordicron]

Ha, I only play conquest when I forget to change game type.

I PUG, thats probably why. I have witnessed so much, just, BAD play on conquest mode- and i dont mean like "lurn to aimz n00b" I mean, players are COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS to what is happening to their team. it's like they are robots programmed to one function, fight or cap, stuck with other robots with the opposing function, with 2 or 3 left over that are trying to help the two sides coordinate. I watch helplessly as the other team(sometimes my team though, but seems like not usually, i blame my no voice chat pugging for this) stays reletively close to one another, with one or two lights or a med going off to cap a point. my team? Runs in 5 directions, and i find out after we get 3/4 of the team blown away trying to flank or cap at least 2 points that one or two of the "cap bots" are like 55kph jager or phract, or my favorite, a 47kph stalker one time. When your team is like this, you can't win. It is so annoying to have an excellent game with one other team mate, and the other 6 couldnt cap enough to get half way to a win, and end up with like 47 dmg because they stroll in to cap a point and 5 of the enemy are there to greet them. Or they try to cap, because OMG it's 6 againts 2! and now cap is the only option, and of course there is no way to hold enough cap points to win when it is 6 vs 2, and they die horrid deaths.

At least in assault most of my contribution counts in the end, and a cap just means the game is over so I can start a new one. Cap inevitable? Time to roll out like Optimus Prime and go out in grand style.